I guess the alternative is to put your SSD under a nice glass protection, and display it for your friends to fawn over. Actually using it might damage it !
really depends. 1- responsiveness is not speed. Some users care about boot and app launch times, other about how quickly their dataset / movie conversion... finishes. 2- SSDs are still expensive. I'm fairly sure intelligent caching would let you get as much speed boost from a 16GB SSD as you currently get from a 64GB one that gets filled with rarely-used cruft that happens to be in the same dir as frequently-used files, and misses frequently-used files because it's full already.
Do you have any other example of a directly accessible cache, like what you're calling your SSD ? I don't... And being able to specify size, policies... does not cut it. Cache is transparent and system-managed, so that neither the user nor the apps have to care/know much about it.
Manually installing certain files on certain media does not feel at all like cache to me.
you're assuming 1- all of the OS is accessed often enough to justify being "cached" on the SSD 2- no other code/data (apps...) is used more often than that. 3- users know how to do that, or Linux allows to do that in an intuitive way
My guess is, you're wrong on all counts. Hence the OP's question. Nice opportunity for Linux to show how it can integrate innovations faster than Windows:-p
I've never really upgraded CPUs. By the time my CPU is outdated (2-3 years), my motherboards usually is, too: newer RAMS (SDR - > DDR -> DDR2 -> DDR3), faster HD interfaces ( PATA -> SATA -> SATA2 -> SATA3) and others (USB -> USB2 -> USB3; PCI -> PCIE -> PCIE2), bigger/faster HDs... In the end, I usually rotate entire PCs, they go My Main PC - > My Backup PC -> My parents / Niece.
My gripe with Intel is more about the price of their MBs, especially compared to AMD's. The cheapest AMD MB within an AMD IGP is listed at 54 euros at my favorite retailer ( Asus AMD2+, not 3, but perfs are broadly the same), while Intel's cheapest MB is 84 euros (Gigabyte). Their low-end CPUs are also kinda expensive. And their IGPs also still kinda suck, even for playing video, and definitely for even light gaming.
The interesting thing these days is smaller size. Mini-ITX mainboards are becoming common, there's cheapish ones with AMD2/3 or 1156 sockets, good cases (Silverstone...), huge HDs. Unless you really need a graphics card, you can build a very small and quiet PC.
"English must have borrowed scenario and scenarii before Italian dropped the second ‘i’ in the terminal ‘-ii’ (see this). As it stands, scenarii is formed identically unto concerti and virtuosi; this isn’t an example of “‘-o’ ‘-ii’”, but rather of the somewhat more familiar “‘-o’ ‘-i’” (showing itself as “‘-io’ ‘-ii’”). English is fairly open to absorbing little bits of grammar (such as how to form plurals) from other languages; I imagine that if it still had a case system, it would indeed take unto absorbing foreign inflexions for marking grammatical case. Raifhr Doremítzwr 23:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC English absorbs lots of things, this is partly what makes it colourful in, which is a good thing of course. The problem comes when there is a clash in how to treat absorbed words i.e. how to inflect them. Early on in the borrowing phase all sorts of things can happen, later on most people come to a consensus by various means. That is in the case of scenario and other borrowed words we can have multiple plurals, the consensus would be scenarios and is formed regularly by adding -s and the alternative scenarii is not the consensus use (this can by assumed when teachers may take aversion to it in comprehension for example) and it would follow that it is formed irregularly due to the use of a foreign infelction system that is obvioulsy alien to most English speakers.--Williamsayers79 10:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC) I see absolutely no evidence that English borrowed scenario and scenarii before Italian changed the spelling. It’s not even clear that Italian did shift from -ii to -i. As I understand it, -ii only occurs today, as one of the posters on the link you reference says, in the presence of a stressed i in the singluar (lo zio/gli zii) and particularly not in the case of -io (il gregario/i gregari). I just did a quick search through the Inferno. Several words ended in -ii, but most appeared to be verb forms. The exception was rii. On the other hand, Dante has avversari (adversaries), Tartari (Tartars). I’m pretty sure I’m looking at Dante’s actual spellings, but perhaps I’ve missed something? Searching Project Gutenburg doesn’t turn up scenarii at all, while scenario appears in 231 books, scenarios in 69, and scenari in one (in Italian, written in 1885).
So, given that scenarii doesn’t appear to be a valid Italian plural form in either modern Italian or Dante’s Italian. Latin doesn’t work. The English scenarii seems to be recent. The Engiish scenarii only seems to appear in a limited, technical context, not in general use. The meaning English scenarii is fairly far removed from the Italian meaning scenari (which has more to do with theater than operations research and formal logic)"
my guess is that several issues scale exponentially with diameter: - spin up torque and strain on the motor - precision required for heads placement - vibrations - vertical tolerances (head positionning, platter warp...) Solving those is probably too complicated and expensive to make sense when most people aren't even buying today's top-ine 3.5", 2TB drives.
Internal raid and platter mirroring doesn't make much sense either: eveything remains dependent on a single motor and head mechanism: waht's left must not be a very large proportion of HD dysfunctions.
SSDs improve performance only in very specific scenarii: small random reads are their forte, large reads are OK, writes are bad, especially small random ones. On the desktop, that makes them good system drives, OK Apps drives, bad data drives, terrible log drives. On the desktop, basically, SSD are useful when booting, launching an app, loading a level or other ressources. Nowadays, I boot my PC twice a month, launch apps at most once a day, and don't really play anymore.
To complicate matters, most OSes and apps are made up of a good 50% "dead" files that are very rarely used, and also have log files that get written to frequently. Installing a whole OS, app or game to an SSD is majorly wasteful because of that. Manually segregating "frequently-read" from "frequently-written" and from "dead weight" files within an OS or app is at best cumbersome and difficult, at worst, impossible.
I'm wondering why OSes don't yet support some king of SSD ReadyBoost: it would make a whole lot of sense to use a smallish SSD as a cache for frequently-read (not written) files. One SSD maker has released a thingy that clones the first x sectors of an HD to a SSD. Though automatic and easy, that is very crude, as caches go. I seem to remember one of Linux's filesystem allows to easily use an SSD as an intelligent cache, but that filesystem is fairly marginal ( ZFS ? not sure). MS has not adapted ReadyBoost.
With an adapted ReadyBoost, I'm sure I could get 90% of the benefit of a large (64 Megs) SSD in a much smaller (16 Megs ?) one. I'm waiting for that, or, if MS doesn't wake up, for prices to go way down.
1- The "efficiency" criteria must be generalized: Many reimbursed treatments do not work. Some actually do harm. My (older: 70-80) parents' general practitioner keeps partially canceling treatments they are prescribed by specialists, on account the treatments are too harsh for them, or incompatible with other conditions. I even once had a pharmacists emergency-cancel a doctor's prescription for my 15 yo brother. And I do have a specific counter-example: I spent 2 yrs with regular + physiotherapist reimbursed treatments for acute back pain, these did nothing. At the end of a (non reimbursed) 45-min chiropractic session, I was feeling better than at any time during those 2 yrs. So really, that "efficiency" thing needs to be done, and done well. Right now, even regular physicians are trampling over each other's feet, contradicting each other... and chiropractic does work,at least in some cases. In your words, I'm wondering who really abuses whose trust most egregiously.
2- Placebo is good. I'd be happier to pay $100 for flavored candy that entices my body to fix its own problems, than to pay $100 for killer antibiotics that will create resistant strains, wreak havoc with plenty of good stuff in my body, weaken my immune response next time, and support an industrial-pharmceutical-insurance-politics ringmarole whose ethics I find extremely suspect.
3- Refusing something that works because we don't know how it works (and its correlate sticking with something that doesn't work, because we know it should work), is worse, in my book, than accepting that something works even though we don't know how or why. As part of any learning process, there are regression events, where right before understanding something new, your understand something old less well. Refusing non-understood stuff would mean the end of progress.
Nobody's talking about freedom of speech, just about idiot censors censoring something that is obviously cultural, because they're too dumb, or scared of offending, to appreciate it.
Therein really lies the risk of censorship: 1- censors are not gods: they can fail, and either censor worthy stuff or not censor bad stuff 2- in the case of "commercial" censors like Apple (who does it for the money) they'll always err on the side of not offending, at the expense of promoting challenging, meaningful stuff.
I'm not saying that Apple doesn't have the right to do that... it may even be good for them.
It is bad for us though, and we shouldn't encourage them. There are plenty of much freer platforms for use to support and move to.
It's not so much about client features, as it is about the whole model. I want my suppliers to take care of my ASS: availability, safety, security. All the cloudy things really don't, I can't get neither apps nor data if I get disconnected, there's no guarantee my data won't be lost, nor easy ways to make backups, and no guarantee at all that my data won't be stolen by some 3rd world subcontractor's trainee.
there's only a loose correlation between what's best for you and what you do. It'd be best for me to spend the afternoon exercising, I'm in front of Slahsdot...
Apple is good at making people desire its wares, because they look sexy, trendy, and actually usable. They are also more limited, more expensive, and with a higher purchase and use cost, than other phones. Apple has nicely moved on from "knowledge workers" to "mom and dad", other tech providers still suffer from the linux syndrome: "by nerds, for nerds", which addresses a much smaller market.
Reading the posts he points to, he's basically doing it because he can, and it's in his interest to force devs to spend time specifically on the iPhone: - less dev time for other platforms - maybe slightly better iPhone apps - no platform comoditization - Apps integrate OS/Hardware advances more quickly - he wants to achieve the iPhone = more Apps = more sales = more Apps positive feedback loop.
to me the drawbacks are - entreprises are not gonna like this, though maybe he doesn't care - i'll take a good generic-framework, well-mastered language app over a bad specific-framework, Sorry-just-learning-ObjC one anytime
Re:So let me get this straight...
on
DIY 80GB iPod Touch
·
· Score: 4, Informative
And Marvell announced a v.3 at CES last Jan, no real product announced yet.
All of those support Debian, Ubuntu is on the way out since the new Ubuntu requires some instruction set extension that are not available on the old plugs.
1- which web browser doesn't work ? Safari for windows ? you're right, it kinda sucks. Luckily there are others (thouth that concept 'choice' concept is probably too foreign for you).
2- as opposed to the iPad, with its wonderful Unix subsystem and shell. Windows does have them, btw.
the issue is not how many sites use flash, but haw many can't work without it, or suffer significantly. Using statistics can make you look intelligent and informed, misusing statistics reveals you as an idiot.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess the alternative is to put your SSD under a nice glass protection, and display it for your friends to fawn over. Actually using it might damage it !
really depends.
1- responsiveness is not speed. Some users care about boot and app launch times, other about how quickly their dataset / movie conversion... finishes.
2- SSDs are still expensive. I'm fairly sure intelligent caching would let you get as much speed boost from a 16GB SSD as you currently get from a 64GB one that gets filled with rarely-used cruft that happens to be in the same dir as frequently-used files, and misses frequently-used files because it's full already.
Do you have any other example of a directly accessible cache, like what you're calling your SSD ? I don't... And being able to specify size, policies... does not cut it. Cache is transparent and system-managed, so that neither the user nor the apps have to care/know much about it.
Manually installing certain files on certain media does not feel at all like cache to me.
you're assuming
1- all of the OS is accessed often enough to justify being "cached" on the SSD
2- no other code/data (apps...) is used more often than that.
3- users know how to do that, or Linux allows to do that in an intuitive way
My guess is, you're wrong on all counts. Hence the OP's question. Nice opportunity for Linux to show how it can integrate innovations faster than Windows :-p
I've never really upgraded CPUs. By the time my CPU is outdated (2-3 years), my motherboards usually is, too: newer RAMS (SDR - > DDR -> DDR2 -> DDR3), faster HD interfaces ( PATA -> SATA -> SATA2 -> SATA3) and others (USB -> USB2 -> USB3; PCI -> PCIE -> PCIE2), bigger/faster HDs... In the end, I usually rotate entire PCs, they go My Main PC - > My Backup PC -> My parents / Niece.
My gripe with Intel is more about the price of their MBs, especially compared to AMD's. The cheapest AMD MB within an AMD IGP is listed at 54 euros at my favorite retailer ( Asus AMD2+, not 3, but perfs are broadly the same), while Intel's cheapest MB is 84 euros (Gigabyte). Their low-end CPUs are also kinda expensive. And their IGPs also still kinda suck, even for playing video, and definitely for even light gaming.
The interesting thing these days is smaller size. Mini-ITX mainboards are becoming common, there's cheapish ones with AMD2/3 or 1156 sockets, good cases (Silverstone...), huge HDs. Unless you really need a graphics card, you can build a very small and quiet PC.
Plural might be "scenarios" or "scenarii", but certainly not scenari. Italian plural, "o" -> "i", thus "io" -> "ii".
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Talk:scenarii
"English must have borrowed scenario and scenarii before Italian dropped the second ‘i’ in the terminal ‘-ii’ (see this). As it stands, scenarii is formed identically unto concerti and virtuosi; this isn’t an example of “‘-o’ ‘-ii’”, but rather of the somewhat more familiar “‘-o’ ‘-i’” (showing itself as “‘-io’ ‘-ii’”). English is fairly open to absorbing little bits of grammar (such as how to form plurals) from other languages; I imagine that if it still had a case system, it would indeed take unto absorbing foreign inflexions for marking grammatical case. Raifhr Doremítzwr 23:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC
English absorbs lots of things, this is partly what makes it colourful in, which is a good thing of course. The problem comes when there is a clash in how to treat absorbed words i.e. how to inflect them. Early on in the borrowing phase all sorts of things can happen, later on most people come to a consensus by various means. That is in the case of scenario and other borrowed words we can have multiple plurals, the consensus would be scenarios and is formed regularly by adding -s and the alternative scenarii is not the consensus use (this can by assumed when teachers may take aversion to it in comprehension for example) and it would follow that it is formed irregularly due to the use of a foreign infelction system that is obvioulsy alien to most English speakers.--Williamsayers79 10:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I see absolutely no evidence that English borrowed scenario and scenarii before Italian changed the spelling. It’s not even clear that Italian did shift from -ii to -i. As I understand it, -ii only occurs today, as one of the posters on the link you reference says, in the presence of a stressed i in the singluar (lo zio/gli zii) and particularly not in the case of -io (il gregario/i gregari). I just did a quick search through the Inferno. Several words ended in -ii, but most appeared to be verb forms. The exception was rii. On the other hand, Dante has avversari (adversaries), Tartari (Tartars). I’m pretty sure I’m looking at Dante’s actual spellings, but perhaps I’ve missed something?
Searching Project Gutenburg doesn’t turn up scenarii at all, while scenario appears in 231 books, scenarios in 69, and scenari in one (in Italian, written in 1885).
So, given that
scenarii doesn’t appear to be a valid Italian plural form in either modern Italian or Dante’s Italian.
Latin doesn’t work.
The English scenarii seems to be recent.
The Engiish scenarii only seems to appear in a limited, technical context, not in general use.
The meaning English scenarii is fairly far removed from the Italian meaning scenari (which has more to do with theater than operations research and formal logic)"
my guess is that several issues scale exponentially with diameter:
- spin up torque and strain on the motor
- precision required for heads placement
- vibrations
- vertical tolerances (head positionning, platter warp...)
Solving those is probably too complicated and expensive to make sense when most people aren't even buying today's top-ine 3.5", 2TB drives.
Internal raid and platter mirroring doesn't make much sense either: eveything remains dependent on a single motor and head mechanism: waht's left must not be a very large proportion of HD dysfunctions.
SSDs improve performance only in very specific scenarii: small random reads are their forte, large reads are OK, writes are bad, especially small random ones. On the desktop, that makes them good system drives, OK Apps drives, bad data drives, terrible log drives. On the desktop, basically, SSD are useful when booting, launching an app, loading a level or other ressources. Nowadays, I boot my PC twice a month, launch apps at most once a day, and don't really play anymore.
To complicate matters, most OSes and apps are made up of a good 50% "dead" files that are very rarely used, and also have log files that get written to frequently. Installing a whole OS, app or game to an SSD is majorly wasteful because of that. Manually segregating "frequently-read" from "frequently-written" and from "dead weight" files within an OS or app is at best cumbersome and difficult, at worst, impossible.
I'm wondering why OSes don't yet support some king of SSD ReadyBoost: it would make a whole lot of sense to use a smallish SSD as a cache for frequently-read (not written) files. One SSD maker has released a thingy that clones the first x sectors of an HD to a SSD. Though automatic and easy, that is very crude, as caches go. I seem to remember one of Linux's filesystem allows to easily use an SSD as an intelligent cache, but that filesystem is fairly marginal ( ZFS ? not sure). MS has not adapted ReadyBoost.
With an adapted ReadyBoost, I'm sure I could get 90% of the benefit of a large (64 Megs) SSD in a much smaller (16 Megs ?) one. I'm waiting for that, or, if MS doesn't wake up, for prices to go way down.
1- The "efficiency" criteria must be generalized: Many reimbursed treatments do not work. Some actually do harm. My (older: 70-80) parents' general practitioner keeps partially canceling treatments they are prescribed by specialists, on account the treatments are too harsh for them, or incompatible with other conditions. I even once had a pharmacists emergency-cancel a doctor's prescription for my 15 yo brother. And I do have a specific counter-example: I spent 2 yrs with regular + physiotherapist reimbursed treatments for acute back pain, these did nothing. At the end of a (non reimbursed) 45-min chiropractic session, I was feeling better than at any time during those 2 yrs. So really, that "efficiency" thing needs to be done, and done well. Right now, even regular physicians are trampling over each other's feet, contradicting each other... and chiropractic does work,at least in some cases. In your words, I'm wondering who really abuses whose trust most egregiously.
2- Placebo is good. I'd be happier to pay $100 for flavored candy that entices my body to fix its own problems, than to pay $100 for killer antibiotics that will create resistant strains, wreak havoc with plenty of good stuff in my body, weaken my immune response next time, and support an industrial-pharmceutical-insurance-politics ringmarole whose ethics I find extremely suspect.
3- Refusing something that works because we don't know how it works (and its correlate sticking with something that doesn't work, because we know it should work), is worse, in my book, than accepting that something works even though we don't know how or why. As part of any learning process, there are regression events, where right before understanding something new, your understand something old less well. Refusing non-understood stuff would mean the end of progress.
Nobody's talking about freedom of speech, just about idiot censors censoring something that is obviously cultural, because they're too dumb, or scared of offending, to appreciate it.
Therein really lies the risk of censorship:
1- censors are not gods: they can fail, and either censor worthy stuff or not censor bad stuff
2- in the case of "commercial" censors like Apple (who does it for the money) they'll always err on the side of not offending, at the expense of promoting challenging, meaningful stuff.
I'm not saying that Apple doesn't have the right to do that... it may even be good for them.
It is bad for us though, and we shouldn't encourage them. There are plenty of much freer platforms for use to support and move to.
i'd rather be isolated from any form of anti terrorism...
Yep. But once upon a time copyrights longer than 30 years sounded really ludicrous....
TRIM. Requires OS and controller support, not available on older SSDS, mostly available on new SSDs and new OSes. Always check, though.
google: why do ssd get slower over time. first answer: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2738/8
no comment
It's not so much about client features, as it is about the whole model. I want my suppliers to take care of my ASS: availability, safety, security. All the cloudy things really don't, I can't get neither apps nor data if I get disconnected, there's no guarantee my data won't be lost, nor easy ways to make backups, and no guarantee at all that my data won't be stolen by some 3rd world subcontractor's trainee.
there's only a loose correlation between what's best for you and what you do. It'd be best for me to spend the afternoon exercising, I'm in front of Slahsdot...
Apple is good at making people desire its wares, because they look sexy, trendy, and actually usable. They are also more limited, more expensive, and with a higher purchase and use cost, than other phones. Apple has nicely moved on from "knowledge workers" to "mom and dad", other tech providers still suffer from the linux syndrome: "by nerds, for nerds", which addresses a much smaller market.
Maybe, except Apple also approves of C and C++.
Reading the posts he points to, he's basically doing it because he can, and it's in his interest to force devs to spend time specifically on the iPhone:
- less dev time for other platforms
- maybe slightly better iPhone apps
- no platform comoditization
- Apps integrate OS/Hardware advances more quickly
- he wants to achieve the iPhone = more Apps = more sales = more Apps positive feedback loop.
to me the drawbacks are
- entreprises are not gonna like this, though maybe he doesn't care
- i'll take a good generic-framework, well-mastered language app over a bad specific-framework, Sorry-just-learning-ObjC one anytime
The basic one is still made:
http://www.newit.co.uk/shop/products.php?cat=5 Cheap, USB+Ethernet
Updated version are coming RealSoonNow, including one with HDMI
http://www.newit.co.uk/shop/products.php?cat=11 there's a version with eSATA
http://www.globalscaletechnologies.com/p-33-guruplug-display.aspx
And Marvell announced a v.3 at CES last Jan, no real product announced yet.
All of those support Debian, Ubuntu is on the way out since the new Ubuntu requires some instruction set extension that are not available on the old plugs.
There's a very active community at http://plugcomputer.org/plugforum/index.php
clue: OS != dev toolchain
you're welcome.
my oh my, American, are you ?
1- which web browser doesn't work ? Safari for windows ? you're right, it kinda sucks. Luckily there are others (thouth that concept 'choice' concept is probably too foreign for you).
2- as opposed to the iPad, with its wonderful Unix subsystem and shell. Windows does have them, btw.
gosh i'm bored, answering to that crap.
good luck using your iPad by the pool in full sunlight.
nope. Apple wants you to pay for THEIR content, not get someone else's stuff for free :-p
please do tell me how to filter apple stories to max 1 a day
the issue is not how many sites use flash, but haw many can't work without it, or suffer significantly. Using statistics can make you look intelligent and informed, misusing statistics reveals you as an idiot.